US Soccer Rejects USL and NASL – Do We Trust In Their Decision?

U.S. Soccer has decided not to sanction either the USL or the NASL to operate a Division Two league in 2010:

The U.S. Soccer Board of Directors voted unanimously on Tuesday to not sanction either the USL or the NASL to operate a Division II professional league in 2010.

The decision was made on the recommendation of the Professional League Task Force, which determined that neither organization on its own was able to provide a viable and sustainable operation during the upcoming season. Both organizations were unable to meet U.S. Soccer’s requirement of a minimum of eight viable teams for 2010.

Despite the ruling, the U.S. Soccer Board of Directors has given both organizations seven days to try to work out an interim solution for the 2010 season.

“After carefully reviewing the findings from the Task Force it was clear there are still too many uncertainties for both organizations, which would be extremely difficult to resolve in a timely fashion that would allow them to prepare for the 2010 season,” said U.S. Soccer President Sunil Gulati. “In the best interest of soccer in the United States, we decided to not sanction either league at this point. However, we did encourage both leagues to come together in the next week and attempt to develop another plan which would allow a single league to be approved on a provisional basis. We are committed to finding ways to improve the long-term viability of all leagues and teams and continue the growth of soccer in the United States.”

I see on Twitter that US Soccer is already taking an awful lot of heat for this, being accused of indecisiveness, secrecy and harshness to fans by rejecting both leagues.

But it’s hard to blame US Soccer for the mess America’s lower league rulers have essentially made for themselves over the past six months. However we apportion the blame — and for me, it all stems back to Nike’s ill-considered decision to sell USL to nu-rock in the first place — US Soccer was left between a rock and a hard place here (and was also left dealing with some pretty big egos who wanted everything resolved their way).

Consider the options they had when they received two separate applications for Divsion II leagues:

(1) Approve one or both leagues (US Soccer’s rules apparently allow two D-II leagues to operate). But according to US Soccer, neither league met the “minimum of eight viable teams”. US Soccer surely considered making an exception for one or both leagues, but they obviously concluded neither would have been “a viable and sustainable operation”. And I have to say at this point, they may well have been right: what kind of a league would a four or five team USL be? Could the NASL really scramble together a sustainable business by April starting practically from scratch? It’s clear that US Soccer was not convinced this was the case for either league. Making an exception risked making a mockery of the business of operating professional outdoor leagues in the United States under USSF sanction. And if US Soccer had sanctioned one and not the other, we’d have had a year of lawsuits ahead of us (do you think US Soccer wants to be sued?).

(2) Reject both leagues. US Soccer could have simply rejected both applications and been done with it; they would have been within their rights, given neither league met their stated requirements. Maybe then the NASL decides to try and play unsanctioned. Would this have met Gulati’s mentioned commitment “to improve the long-term viability of all leagues and teams and continue the growth of soccer in the United States.”? No, it would have created a huge mess reminiscent of the dark days of American soccer in the twentieth century.

(3) Reject both leagues, and attempt to force them together. This is essentially what US Soccer has now done (and has probably been pushing hard for behind the scenes for some time), by giving the two leagues “seven days to try to work out an interim solution for the 2010 season”. If that can be done, and if USL and the NASL really want to play sanctioned soccer in 2010 it could and should be, that gives everyone time to work out everything for 2011. It means leaders of both leagues will need to check their egos, but they now have a clear, unavoidable reason to do so thanks to the ultimatum from US Soccer.

The hostile reaction to US Soccer’s decision seems to stem from a complete lack of trust in the organization, because I’m unsure how a sensible observer could not see the third option as the best choice, and it is a decisive choice. If there was another alternate, better option, I’ve yet to hear it (comment away!).

We don’t have all the information on the USL and NASL from which US Soccer determined neither was a viable operation for 2010, and we will never have it, as it’s confidential — and rightly so. Do we have to trust US Soccer has made an informed, sensible decision here? I think from what we know of their options, I would say so.

US Soccer Rejects USL and NASL – Do We Trust In Their Decision?

Rate this post

PitchInvasion » News » US Soccer Rejects USL and NASL – Do We Trust In Their Decision?

SHARE

COMMENTS- 19 -

December 30, 2009 at 1:06 pmMatthew N

I think the “reject both leagues and force them to work together” approach is certainly the best one for soccer as a whole, but I think it is incredibly naive to think that these two sides will come to any sort of agreement. The NASL clubs left USL because of differences that aren’t going to be resolved. USSF knows this. It is absolutely ludicrous that a nation of our size doesn’t have a series of professional leagues like the Europeans that can help develop talent and feed the upper divisions…

December 30, 2009 at 1:09 pmJosh Crockett

Forgive the naive question, but what is the practical impact to either league of playing unsanctioned?

December 30, 2009 at 1:19 pmJason Davis

I may write up my expanded thoughts at my site later, but for now:

USSF has publicly reprimanded both sides, and given them a deadline. Separate, at least for 2010, they’re two very weak leagues (for different reasons, but nonetheless). It makes sense to force them to compromise now, with the door open for a revised agreement/split/sale/compensation package at the end of the season, and play 2010 as a transitional year.

Josh — any player participating in an unsanctioned league would be banned forever from all FIFA-sanctioned leagues. So the hard part would be finding players who would not mind never having the opportunity to play in every other professional league in the world. Same would go for referees, etc.

Matthew — I don’t think it’s incredibly naive: both leagues need to play in 2010, and they’d be pretty damn stupid not to try and figure out an interim, one year solution, as Jason says.

December 30, 2009 at 1:39 pmKT

Tom:

As I’m sure you know, because you linked to it, USSF rules apparently allow up to FOUR DII leagues.

Are you sure that the players participating in an unsanctioned league would be banned FOREVER? And I thought it was from FIFA Competitions, not FIFA leagues. Admittedly, the precedent on that is sketchy.

But the players who played in the NPSL in 1967 (one of the two competing American leagues that sprang up that year) were NOT “banned forever.” I do not have another precedent to share that would go against that. Many of those players did play in the merged league (the NASL) the following year.

As for it being “incredibly naive” to think the two sides can come together – well, you’d be surprised what people can do when their feet are held to the fire. At this point, they may just have to agree to live together in a War of the Roses type scenario for a year while making plans for 2011 for themselves.

As for everything else – Tom, I wholeheartedly endorse your take on this. Those who have spent the last several weeks ripping on USL are now ripping USSF because they didn’t get their wish of a new league. Even though the NASL has – apparently – four actual franchises and a bunch of vaporware. But, yeah, that’s the “obvious option,” to hear some people say it.

December 30, 2009 at 1:39 pmMicah

So this means USL and NASL must merge or one and/or both needs to have at least 8 teams to be in operation for 2011?

December 30, 2009 at 1:50 pmJeff

Josh — any player participating in an unsanctioned league would be banned forever from all FIFA-sanctioned leagues.

Pardon me, but isn’t this a HUGE problem? Why is FIFA allowed to go on such a ridiculous ego trip and have no one call them on it while we expect US soccer league and team owners to check theirs?

The NPSL thing was actually similar, but there was an “amnesty” agreed with FIFA/USSFA declared on the NPSL outlaws when they merged with the sanctioned USA league to form the NASL in 1968 (though British players returning to the FA were still given a ban, albeit watered down to one year).

It’s plausible the same future “amnesty” could happen to the NASL, if they played unsanctioned in 2010, but it’d be a big risk.

Micah — they are pretty much forced to come up with a temporary “merger” for 2010. Neither will be approved alone now.

Jeff — well, FIFA is the world’s governing body, and US Soccer is a member of FIFA, so the sanctioned leagues have to adhere by the rules. It makes sense that to be part of a sanctioned league, you have to meet certain criteria, I think. Anyone could set up their own league outside of FIFA and US Soccer, but that would bring up the problems KT and I are discussing in the comments in terms of being an “outlaw” league.

The more I look at this, the more it feels like a victory for NuRock. USL already has the league, and basically, there’s nothing in the USSF’s decision that says NuRock can’t pick and choose which clubs to let back into USL-1 for the 2010 season. They could easily invite everyone back EXCEPT the TOA ringleaders, thus leaving supporters in Raleigh, Miami, Minnesota and St. Louis without a club to support in 2010.

As a Carolina Railhawks supporter, I feel like the USSF has left my club out in the cold with this decision. It’s enough to make me want to support Slovenia this summer.

I can’t answer your question objectively. I wanted too much to see the NASL happen in 2010, just for the sake of the Railhawks.

But there’s no other real scenario here except that USL-1 returns for one more year, and I see nothing to indicate that the USSF has ordered the USL to let all the breakaway clubs back in for 2010 or else. Maybe that’s the subtext of the USSF ruling, but even if it is, do the TOA clubs suck it up and play in USL for one more season? Carolina might, but I suspect Traffic may decide to put Miami FC on the sidelines next to Atlanta and wait until the NASL has its ducks in a row. And I have no idea what happens to St. Louis in all this.

December 30, 2009 at 2:49 pmTimoteo

What will be interesting to see is what will happen IF they don’t come to an agreement. What will Portland, Vancouver and Montreal do? They have a lot to lose by sitting idle for a year. What they might do is not play in a league, still have a team and schedule a lot of friendlies against different MLS teams, each other and Mexican teams. They probably would ask USSF to be allowed to play in the Cup. Do you think USSF would go for this?

December 30, 2009 at 3:08 pmMrTuktoyaktuk

Hard to see a shotgun marriage between TOA and USL at this point.

Also – Hard to see any path to resolving this that doesn’t involve the TOA writing a big check to Nu-rock/USL if they want to get sanctioned.

December 30, 2009 at 3:52 pmKT

“Hard to see a shotgun marriage between TOA and USL at this point.”

Why?

First off (and to the other point): We’ve long known that FIFA makes the rules. If you want to play, you play by them, or you don’t play. They are far too strong and far too entrenched to make anybody’s attempt to reform the system anything but a long, tedious, expensive process. Any FIFA reform is going to have to come from within with a new leader, and God knows when we’ll see that.

Secondly, you’d be surprised what people will put up with when they have few other options. Remember – it’s not just NASL that has just been told they’re out of the game for now – USL has a vested interest in some sort of agreement, unless they want to have Portland, Austin and Puerto Rico play exhibition games all summer. What they have going for them is that their business is about much, much more than just the top professional division. The actual money in USL is in the leagues below that – but the bellwether, the one that gets the most attention (and a hell of a lot more of it in the last 90 days or so than it has gotten to this point) is the top pro division.

I wish everyone would look at the ACTUAL number of viable teams the NASL has for one second: Montreal, Vancouver, Rochester and (to a lesser extent) Carolina have some history and infrastructure and track record. Vancouver’s out in 2011, to be replaced by Edmonton, a team that, at this moment, does not have a name or a ball or anything but an idea, in a market that I’m sure no one is going to mistake for Seattle, for example.

Then there’s Miami and Minnesota – Minnesota has nothing and Miami has next to nothing, despite having been around for the last few years. For all intents and purposes, there is no Minnesota Thunder anymore. Counting them is like counting the votes of dead people in an election in Chicago.

Tampa Bay and New York are expansion teams, announced in’08 and ’09, respectively. Tampa Bay has a coach with no coaching experience, a GM with no GM experience, no stadium, some vague list of players they may have identified at a combine in Liverpool, and green-and-white hoop socks (we assume – they haven’t unveiled uniforms yet). New York has even less than that, and has had, since the beginning, the look of something that had no chance to work.

Atlanta would be coming back from a year’s hiatus, and, let’s be honest here – they weren’t exactly setting the world on fire when they were active. They do have their own stadium, which they control, and if it had plumbing, it would be even nicer.

And St. Louis came into existence (or so it is said) about an hour and a half ago, and has a Europosing name and a manager who couldn’t handle Raith Rovers.

Does THAT look like where you want to throw your hat for 2010?

No. Neither, quite frankly, does USL.

But while I’ve been typing this comment, USL put out a statement, part of which reads:

“Although USL is respectful of the need to ensure that decisions being made are in the best interests of soccer and player development in the United States, it has detailed in its recent USL-1 2010 season re-sanctioning presentation that it is both willing and able to meet all published USSF Division II Men’s Professional League standards, including fielding a minimum of eight teams.

“In support of USSF’s efforts to find a resolution for the upcoming season at its Division II Men’s Professional League level, USL very recently agreed to one of the proposals made by USSF requiring USL-1 and the contemplated North American Soccer League (NASL) to come together for 2010. USL remains willing to proceed with this USSF-proposed scenario in order to enable the 2010 season over the course of the next several days.

“Meanwhile, USL will continue to move ahead with its preparations for the 2010 USL-1 season in the appropriate membership category.”

USL is:

Prepared to have eight teams (they’re about five short, by my count);
Willing to come together with the NASL for 2010, per USSF’s request, but the offer’s only good for a little while; and
Ready to move ahead, regardless.

NEITHER side is 100% right or 100% wrong. Neither side is the obvious choice going forward. Neither is without its flaws.

A compromise, which either results in a renewed relationship down the road or gives each side time to plan its own affairs for 2011, seems the best and most likely scenario at this point.

As long as Selby Wellman gets his rental car deal, we should be good to go.

December 30, 2009 at 4:43 pmSuper Rookie

KT-

You are right about the Thunder being non-existent.

You are wrong about there not being a D-II here in Minnesota as the National Sports Center has the infrastructure, ability and no how to have a team next year. No matter what league is sanctioned they will be in it. The NASL needs to stop utilizing the Thunder name in their press releases and start referring to the team from Minnesota as being owned and operated by the NSC as has been reported on the amazing site: http://www.insidemnsoccer.com

December 30, 2009 at 5:19 pmPaul Schmidt

How about USSF running the 2010 league?

December 30, 2009 at 7:10 pmJLM

“I’m still not sure what else the USSF could have done. What do you think would have been a better option”

That’s just it. There is no other decision USSF could have made. I’m surprised that more people didn’t see this as the inevitable initial outcome.

Also, there is usually substantial difference (or at least unspoken information, in any scenario) between what’s in a press release and what’s actually happening. There’s no reason to think USSF isn’t also arbitrating to resolve this while putting public pressure now to force the hands of all parties.

December 30, 2009 at 9:51 pmBuffalo Mike

Divisionalize (or “Conferenciate”) each “league”, allow each to operate on their own terms, a mixed schedule, force them to arbitrate a provisional “League Office”…and then get a Big Wooden Spoon.

The spoon ain’t for stirring…when someone gets out of line, you crack them on the head with it until they shut up.

Also, you can eat pie with it.

Which is a lot better than just sticking your dirty old thumb in there just to see what you can pluck out.
I mean, all that does is leave is a big mess of rotten thumb-stained fruit laying around in a dish…and no one wants that…
Unless you’re English, of course…and then…(and you can back me up on this)… I think it’s OK.

Plus – A lot of other people are probably sitting there patiently with their little plates…and maybe even a fork..
Did I Mention The Spoon?
It’s a lot less scary than sticking a bunch of spikes on a stick in your face, even when you’re eating pie..or especially a custard or tiramisu or something like that. Those are non-militaristic things that spoons are definitely also quite useful for.
I will concede that, for instance, most fruits – at least in their raw or unprocessed forms – you would usually be OK just using your hands… I totally agree with that. I won’t argue it one bit. I’m not here trying to push Spoons down your throat or anything…
But even then, why would you use your thumb? At the risk of offending the monodigital crowd – that just doesn’t seem to be very efficient, does it?

Anyways, all I’m trying to say is this: In the right hands, a Spoon can be quite the tool.
Well, actually, probably in the right hand…hahaha…
….or in the left too I suppose, but that’s beside the point all I’m really trying to say is this: You never know when someone might come along with Whipped Cream.

The Fan Of The Game In This Country has grown exponentially…even the Quality Of The Game has grown more than sometimes appreciated…
But Quality of the Organization is sometimes, at too many levels, so sorely lacking, that it honestly makes me a little bit sick to my stomach.